1967: THE LUCILA LALU CASE: THE ORIGINAL CHOP-CHOP LADY

Lucila Lalu left Barrio Mapaniqui (Candaba, Pampanga) for Manila sometime in 1961. As with many others before her, it was the old search for a good life in the city. In Manila,
she secured a police clearance to work as a waitress and was promptly
hired by one of the city’s small-time night spots. Not long after, she
met a patrolman, Aniano Vera, a married man with whom she, nevertheless,
decided to live in common-law marriage. The relationship produced a
son, and her job, some savings which eventually enabled her to buy out
the owners of the Pagoda Soda Fountain on Rizal Avenue,
a cocktail lounge and restaurant rolled into one. Business was kind and
busy, and she earned enough to establish another concern --- a beauty
parlor on Mayhaligue st., Sta. Cruz. The modest success bred, too, the
indulgent side in her, and she took on a lover whom she set up in an
apartment and then supported.

At
28, Lucila spent most of her time and energy on these three main
concerns of her life--- business, family and love. If not with equal
enthusiasm, at least with an apparent resolve not to give up any member
of the triangle. And she was best of health and spirits.

Until
one Sunday (May 28), or perhaps it was a Monday, late last month, when
the hand of violence snuffed out her life and scattered her body in
little pieces all over the city. First, her legs were found, chopped
expertly into four pieces and wrapped in a newspaper dated May 14, 1967,
in a garbage can on Malabon st., Sta. Cruz, about a stone’s throw from
her cocktail lounge. A day later, her body, headless and legless, was
found on a vacant lot along Epifanio de los Santos Avenue, just beyond the bend of Guadalupe Bridge in Makati.
It took time, of course, to identify her in the little pieces, but the
police managed somehow to get fingerprints off the dead hands which
subsequently found to match those in a police clearance file on one
Lucila Lalu.

Lucila, in death, hugged page one.
Police investigators --- in the hope of finding her head and, more
important, her murderer --- dug deep into her recent past. The arrest of
the lover, 19-year-old Florante Relos, precipitated headlines such as
“MPD solves murder of dismembered girl.” Relos had an airtight alibi,
however, and he appeared to have he least of reasons for killing her.
“She was good to me,” he told the police and admitted having had
intimate relations with the victim. Happily for him, two friends
corroborated his claim that he was somewhere else at the time of the
murder --- which was between late Sunday evening and Monday noon,
according to the results of the autopsy.

Relos was freed, but he refused to
leave police headquarters, “for fear of his life.” Suspicion shifted to
the victim’s common-law husband Patrolman Vera. And again, people began
saying, “The case is solved; Vera killed her in a fit of jealousy.”
Relos testified that Pat. Vera had mauled him once in the Pagoda Soda
Fountain when Vera found Lucila embracing him. But the police could not
find any direct evidence connecting the patrolman to the crime, beyond
an apparently strong motive.

As the case developed, the sordid side
of Lucila’s life rather than her murderer surfaced. Reports poured in
that Lucila had other lovers and the police responded by hunting them.
The testimony of eager beavers in the case was varied and contradictory.
Lucila’s neighbors claimed they saw three men dragging what looked like
a body from Lucila’s residence. Vera claimed he saw Lucila hale and
hearty hours after the neighbors “had seen” her body being dragged away.
A friend of the victim stated that Lucila wanted to end her
relationship with Relos, but Relos swears the woman was very much in
love with him. And so on. And so forth. The
police, for their part, theorized on the circumstances behind the
murder. From what was left of Lucila, they surmised that the murder
could only have been committed by someone familiar with the use of
knives and such --- say a butcher or a surgeon or at least a pre-med
student. The killer must have used a private vehicle to dispose of the
torso and legs, and because these were very cold to the touch when
found, the remains, the police said, must have been stored in a freezer.
These led to speculation that a wealthy man may have been involved in
the case, in addition to the earlier and credible theory that the killer
must be intelligent, methodical and some sort of professional.

After
a week of investigating and prying for information, the police still
had no murderer to show before the public. And the victim’s head still
had to be recovered. This led not a few people to feel that local
sleuths, be they Manila’s
finest or our intelligence agents, are not fine enough. Given an
intelligent murderer, one who is not an easy prey to passion and hence
is not likely to be careless, a case can drag on unresolved, as in fact
many have in the past.

Source: Weekly Graphic magazine/June 14, 1967

June
15, 1967- Jose Luis Santiano, a 28-year old dental student surfaced and
confessed to the crime. He recounted and detailed the events that led
to the brutal killing. However, a few days later, he retracted and
repudiated his confession and insisted on his innocence. But the
authorities were firmed on their decision to pursue the case against
the new suspect. New evidences uncovered pinpointed to Santiano.

"Chop chop lady"

Chop-chop. A term coined to describe what is
done to easily and inconspicuously dispose of the remains of a murder
victim. The term was first used in the Philippines when the dismembered
body parts of Lucila Lalu were found in different cities in May of 1967.

After
Lalu's murder was discovered, four suspects surfaced, all said to be
romantically linked to Lucila: a waiter, a dentistry student, a police
officer and an executive in a printing firm unnamed by authorities.

Who
is Lucila Lalu? Why was she killed? Why, after one of the suspects
confessed to committing the crime, has the case remained an unsolved
mystery almost 42 years after it happened?

Listen to Manila Mayor
Alfredo Lim who was a Sergeant and the Head of the Manila Police
Department's Follow-up Group in charge of the investigation recount
aspects of the case. And under the helm of Gawad CCP awardee indie
director Sandino Magno, watch a recreation of how the crime was
committed.